Sudacafan
Talk Tennis Guru
That’s what we’ve been talking about.
We are a sadomasochistic group. Welcome!
Match points saved and squandered by the Big Four
- Thread starter jm1980
- Start date
We are a sadomasochistic group. Welcome!
jm1980
G.O.A.T.
I was able to find this report on the 2001 Novak match, and I'm now comfortable adding it to the list:
The 20-year-old Swiss held a match point at 5-4 and 40-30 in the third set against Novak but was passed going for a volley.
Finding anything about the 2002 Escude match is proving difficult, partially because it's overshadowed by the final they played in Rotterdam in 2001 (which Escude won), and by the 3 match points Escude saved in the semifinal against Grosjean. There are no mentions of a saved MP against Federer in the QF, even though he was already kind of a big deal then.
jm1980
G.O.A.T.
I think I finally cracked the mystery. The sources claiming Federer had a match point against Escude in their 2002 Rotterdam (from this table) match all trace back to Swiss journalists Simon Graf and Rene Stauffer. According to Graf (source), the match point came at 6-5 in the second set tiebreaker.
However, this is contradicted by all other independent sources:
On Friday, the 25-year-old trailed 3-5 in the second-set tiebreak before reeling off three straight points and holding on to knot the contest. (source)
Mené 5-3 dans le tie-break, il [Escude] a réussi un petit miracle pour égaliser à une manche partout. (source)
There were several mini breaks before Escude levelled the match by clinching the tiebreak 10-8 on his fourth set point. (source)
The facts here are:
1. Federer led 5-3 in the tiebreaker
2. Escude won 3 points in a row after that
3. Escude converted on his 4th set point
4. Tiebreaker ended 10-8
There is only one possible sequence of points that respects these conditions. If Federer had one match point at 6-5 (or at any score, really) this would contradict bullet points 2 and 3 (since Escude would have had a maximum of 3 set points)
The German version of the swissinfo.ch article on the match also claims Federer was two points away from winning (source):
Federer war in einer Neuauflage des letztjährigen Finals im Tiebreak des zweiten Satzes zwei Gewinnpunkte von einer gelungenen Revanche entfernt.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, it's safe to say Federer did NOT have a match point in this match.
However, this is contradicted by all other independent sources:
On Friday, the 25-year-old trailed 3-5 in the second-set tiebreak before reeling off three straight points and holding on to knot the contest. (source)
Mené 5-3 dans le tie-break, il [Escude] a réussi un petit miracle pour égaliser à une manche partout. (source)
There were several mini breaks before Escude levelled the match by clinching the tiebreak 10-8 on his fourth set point. (source)
The facts here are:
1. Federer led 5-3 in the tiebreaker
2. Escude won 3 points in a row after that
3. Escude converted on his 4th set point
4. Tiebreaker ended 10-8
There is only one possible sequence of points that respects these conditions. If Federer had one match point at 6-5 (or at any score, really) this would contradict bullet points 2 and 3 (since Escude would have had a maximum of 3 set points)
The German version of the swissinfo.ch article on the match also claims Federer was two points away from winning (source):
Federer war in einer Neuauflage des letztjährigen Finals im Tiebreak des zweiten Satzes zwei Gewinnpunkte von einer gelungenen Revanche entfernt.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, it's safe to say Federer did NOT have a match point in this match.
Last edited:
Sudacafan
Talk Tennis Guru
Thanks! What a relief!I think I finally cracked the mystery. The sources claiming Federer had a match point against Escude in their 2002 Rotterdam match all trace back to Simon Graf, a Swiss journalist. According to Simon himself (source), the match point came at 6-5 in the second set tiebreaker.
However, this is contradicted by all other independent sources:
On Friday, the 25-year-old trailed 3-5 in the second-set tiebreak before reeling off three straight points and holding on to knot the contest. (source)
Mené 5-3 dans le tie-break, il [Escude] a réussi un petit miracle pour égaliser à une manche partout. (source)
There were several mini breaks before Escude levelled the match by clinching the tiebreak 10-8 on his fourth set point. (source)
The facts are:
1. Federer led 5-3
2. Escude won 3 points in a row after that
3. Escude converted on his 4th set point
4. Tiebreaker ended 10-8
There is only one possible sequence of points that respects these conditions. Simon's version that Federer had one match point at 6-5 (or at any score, really) contradicts bullet points 2 and 3 (since Escude would have had a maximum of 3 set points)
The German version of the swissinfo.ch article on the match also claims Federer was two points away from winning (source):
Federer war in einer Neuauflage des letztjährigen Finals im Tiebreak des zweiten Satzes zwei Gewinnpunkte von einer gelungenen Revanche entfernt.
Unless some new evidence comes to light, it's safe to say Federer did NOT have a match point in this match.
Backspin1183
G.O.A.T.
Yup. Nadal saved a MP to win the final.
N01E
Hall of Fame
Yes, that's why I commented when both had MPs. It was quite difficult for that match not to appear here afterwards.
AnOctorokForDinner
G.O.A.T.
Netcordal lol.
Backspin1183
G.O.A.T.
Save #16 for Nadal with today's win over Shapo.
He handed it to Shapo then took it back actually.
Sport
G.O.A.T.
Yup. 16-8.